New Delhi: The Central government has introduced the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha with the aim of strengthening the legal framework against examination fraud and paper leaks across the country. A key provision of the proposed legislation empowers the Centre to constitute a Special Task Force (STF) to investigate cases of malpractice in public examinations. However, the proposal has triggered concerns among educationists, who argue that it could infringe upon the constitutional powers of state governments.
Under the proposed amendment, once the Centre constitutes an STF to investigate alleged irregularities or paper leaks in a public examination, state agencies will no longer be authorised to conduct a parallel investigation into the same case. The existing law permits investigations by police officers not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police or Assistant Commissioner of Police and also allows the Union government to refer cases to a central investigating agency when necessary. The amendment seeks to expand these powers by introducing the STF mechanism.
Education experts have argued that law and order is a subject under the State List of the Constitution. They contend that if the Centre can unilaterally deploy an STF to investigate alleged malpractices involving state governments or state universities, it could limit the constitutional authority of states to investigate matters within their own jurisdiction. Some experts have also expressed concern that the provision could be politically misused, particularly in cases involving Opposition-ruled states.
Under the current legal framework, a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe in a state is generally initiated only with the consent of the state government or on the directions of a High Court or the Supreme Court. The proposed amendment, however, would allow the Centre to order an STF investigation into examination-related offences without requiring prior approval from the concerned state government. This provision has emerged as one of the most debated aspects of the Bill.
The proposed legislation comes in the wake of several major examination paper leak incidents and widespread student protests witnessed in recent years. According to the government, stronger legal provisions are necessary to safeguard the integrity of public examinations and dismantle organised examination fraud networks.
The Bill identifies 15 categories of examination malpractice, including leaking question papers, tampering with OMR sheets, creating fake examination websites, issuing forged admit cards and other organised forms of cheating. The objective is to bring every stage of examination-related fraud within a comprehensive legal framework.
The amendment also proposes significantly stricter punishments. For individuals convicted of examination fraud, the prescribed imprisonment would increase from three to five years under the existing law to five to ten years, while the maximum fine would rise from ₹10 lakh to ₹50 lakh. Service providers found guilty of facilitating malpractice could face fines of up to ₹4 crore, compared with the current ₹1 crore, along with debarment from conducting public examinations for eight years instead of four.
Where the offence is committed with the consent or involvement of directors, senior management or persons in charge of a service provider, the proposed law prescribes a minimum imprisonment of five years and fines of up to ₹5 crore. In cases involving organised examination crime, including large-scale paper leak conspiracies involving examination authorities or criminal syndicates, the minimum prison term would increase to seven years, while the minimum fine would be raised to ₹10 crore.
The Bill also seeks to ensure speedy disposal of such cases by mandating every state and Union Territory to designate a special fast-track court for offences under the Act. Investigations would be required to be completed within two months, followed by completion of the trial within three months.
Despite welcoming stronger action against examination fraud, several educationists maintain that harsher punishments alone will not eliminate paper leaks. They argue that examination authorities must be made more autonomous, professionally managed and accountable, with stronger digital security, transparent administrative systems and robust oversight mechanisms to effectively curb organised examination fraud.
